Energy Service Partners reviews
• last updated FEB 26, 2026Loading map...
The Verdict
Energy Service Partners isn't worth the risk. We analyzed thousands of reviews and found a company that often bundles basic mistakes into projects that should be routine. One homeowner watched their project drag from a promised six months to 19 months because ESP filed permits with the wrong address, then blamed the utility until the customer discovered the error themselves. Another called daily for a year trying to get someone to acknowledge a missing meter that blocked their bill credits. The pattern is clear: 294 reviews cite poor value (a 1.8 score, the lowest we tracked), and 358 mention post-sale support problems that balance out the 359 positive mentions. Even when installations go smoothly (and many do, with crews praised for efficiency and cleanup), the aftermath can be a minefield. We found 193 reviews describing delays, unresponsive coordinators, and warranty claims denied with boilerplate emails. If you need solar and want to sleep at night, explore installers whose support track record matches their installation quality.
If you're willing to gamble that your project lands in the smooth half of their portfolio, you might be fine. But with nearly 300 complaints about value and a coin-flip on whether post-sale support will answer your calls, better options exist.
Reviews That Shaped Our Verdict
Misty Cheng has spent more than a year trying to get ESP Energy to fix a problem with a residential solar install, and the experience ended up as a lesson in missed hardware and missing accountability. She and her assistant discovered the system was producing energy but not transmitting production data to Southern California Edison (SCE), which meant she never received the proper bill credits; they traced the fault to a missing meter inside one of the inverters. After that finding, she called every day and was repeatedly routed to the person in charge, who failed to answer calls or return messages, even though ESP Energy kept assuring her the system was working fine. The company never acknowledged the installation error, never offered a resolution, and ignored requests for a refund or partial credit for the months the system wasn’t reporting. What stands out in her account is the concrete cause—the absent inverter meter that stopped SCE credits—and the company’s failure to take responsibility for a problem that directly raised her electricity costs.
Chon Winger began a solar installation in March 2022 for two houses tied to the same meter and was told the job would finish by September 2022. Nineteen months later, in November 2023, they still faced a partially completed system and a long trail of avoidable mistakes. They watched the project stall as two project coordinators left, and every representative they worked with proved unresponsive. Promised timelines and updates slipped repeatedly, scheduled work was canceled without explanation, and applications or permits were filed with basic errors—or not filed at all. Sloppy workmanship created more delays, and the company repeatedly blamed SDGE and outside contractors instead of owning its own errors. Over 19 months they found themselves spending hours each month chasing answers and doing the investigative work ESP wouldn’t. When the system was finally energized, they discovered the company hadn’t filed the correct net metering aggregation paperwork, so the panels only power one house instead of both. A particularly striking failure: ESP put the wrong address on an application—an error Chon uncovered through their own follow-up—which prolonged the timeline further. Reassur
Zaid Al-Ahmar has had an ESP solar system on his home since 2022 and this spring watched the SolarEdge inverter fault repeatedly — the unit showed all indicator lights solid (green, blue and red), the SolarEdge app couldn’t connect, and the Solar Meter showed the array repeatedly trying and failing to come online. The first time he followed the reset instructions and the system recovered; a week later the same fault returned, so he opened a ticket and waited for ESP to investigate. After another manual reset got the array producing again, ESP closed the warranty request, telling him the issue fell outside coverage and citing the original system design. The contact number in the warranty agent’s signature turned out not to be in service, callback requests went unanswered, and their email response blamed an arc that the reset cleared — even though the problem recurred. On 5/18/25 the fault happened again on a Sunday so he had to reset the system himself, and on 06/04/2025 ESP called to say they and SolarEdge had pushed a firmware update and closed the ticket after a brief stretch without issues. The inverter failed yet again afterward — the fourth or fifth time across about two meses
Platforms Monitored
Performance by Work Type
How We Got To Trust Score 45
Buyer Beware
Unauthorized Activities
12 reports
Misleading Claims
7 reports
Background Check
Serving customers for 10 years
Operating longer than most installers in the market.
BBB Rating: A+
Excellent BBB standing. Strong complaint resolution.
Natural Review Patterns
Reviews were posted naturally over time.
Contractor License
License information could not be confirmed.
What You Can Expect
Dennis T. endured an 18-month slog of errors and miscommunication to get a rooftop solar installation on his home; at the end of that run the system finally registered as "in production," but the victory felt hollow. He discovered there was no walkthrough to show how the system actually operates or how to monitor its output, and when problems surfaced ESP effectively washed their hands, saying they couldn’t help because, "technically," EverBright holds the contract. Earlier, Dan O. from ESP had apologized for the delays and promised they would make things right once the project finished, yet Dennis ended up with no follow-through. The monitoring software won’t record at night, EverBright won’t provide night support, and by daytime EverBright’s response has been that "all looks all right" from their side—leaving him without clear reassurance or a working handoff. He closes by asking whether anyone has pursued legal action against ESP, EverBright, or Omnidian to force a resolution.
Dennis began a battery-backed solar installation in February 2024 and found the project dragging into an 18-month ordeal. He discovered installers were working from incomplete or unread plans, which led to four failed Riverside County inspections and constant back-and-forth. Communication came in pieces from different people with no single project manager assigned, so weeks went by without anyone who understood the whole job; he had to call, write, and even go to Riverside County in person — paying out of pocket — to push a plan update through. At one point a sales rep altered the paperwork and removed one of the three batteries on the plan, but the crew installed only two because they worked off the older version. ESP never deducted the cost of the omitted battery from his bill; he caught that discrepancy himself and avoided being charged for equipment he didn’t receive. On top of the billing mess, the system never received a proper handover: battery lights blink with error codes at night and no one from ESP ever did a test run with him to prove the setup worked. When he raised the failures, ESP shifted responsibility to Everbright, effectively “washing their hands.” He told them,
Etienne signed a contract with ESP in February 2022 for a system intended to be installed within six months so his Palm Springs home would be ready for the summer. What followed turned into a long series of missed deadlines and broken handoffs: by April 2024 the panels still weren’t producing, city inspections failed at least twice, and ESP plus their partner repeatedly failed to supply the paperwork SoCal Edison needed for interconnection — four additional failures alone noted by September 2024. He spent months having to chase status updates, watched third‑party vendors get mishandled, and faced ongoing errors and poor communication rather than any proactive project management. By November 15, 2024 the system still wasn’t hooked to the grid, and he was left considering legal action after nearly three years of waiting. The clearest takeaway: a contract signed for a six‑month turnaround in Palm Springs ended with repeated inspection failures and missing interconnection documents, leaving the homeowner to constantly pursue progress and contemplate suing to get resolution.